The present study aims to explore how second language (L2) speakers process four types of presupposition triggers in an online self-paced reading task and an offline acceptability judgment task. The four types of triggers are definite expressions with the, the factive verb know, the change-of-state verb stop and the additive particle also. Of particular interest is L2 speakers’ ability to accommodate a presupposition when it is neither falsified nor supported in the context. The results showed that the L2 speakers accommodated presuppositions in a native-like manner in the offline judgment task, and that accommodation was taxing and less automatic in online processing. Additionally, advanced L2 speakers’ interpretations were affected by the types of presupposition triggers. We discuss the results in connection to the Interface Hypothesis and hope to contribute to a more precise understanding of information integration in L2 processing, as well as L2 acquisition at the semantics–pragmatics interface.
Anwyl-IrvineALMassonniéJFlittonAKirkhamNEvershedJK (2019) Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods52: 388–407.
2.
BarrDLevyRScheepersCTilyH (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language68: 255–78.
3.
BatesDMaechlerMBolkerBWalkerS (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67: 1–48.
4.
BellettiABennatiESoraceA (2007) Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: Evidence from near-native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory25: 657–89.
5.
BillCRomoliJSchwarzFCrainS (2016). Scalar implicatures versus presuppositions: The view from acquisition. Topoi35: 57–71.
ChemlaEBottL (2013) Processing presuppositions: Dynamic semantics vs. pragmatic enrichment. Language and Cognitive Processes38: 241–60.
8.
ChoJ (2017) The acquisition of different types of definite noun phrases in L2-English. The International Journal of Bilingualism21: 367–82.
9.
ChoJ (2022a) Online processing and offline judgments of L2-English articles. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism12: 280–309.
10.
ChoJ (2022b) Scalar implicatures in adult L2 learners: A self-paced reading study. Second Language Research. Advance online publication. http://doi.org/10.1177/02676583221134058
CunningsI (2017) Parsing and working memory in bilingual sentence processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition20: 659–78.
13.
DaskalakiEChondrogianniVBlomEArgyriFParadisJ (2019) Input effects across domains: The case of Greek subjects in child heritage language. Second Language Research35: 421–45.
14.
DestruelEDonaldsonB (2017) Second language acquisition of pragmatic inferences: Evidence from the French c’est-cleft. Applied Psycholinguistics38: 703–32.
15.
DomaneschiFCarreaEPencoCGrecoA (2014) The cognitive load of presupposition triggers: Mandatory and optional repairs in presupposition failure. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience29: 136–46.
16.
DonaldsonB (2012) Syntax and discourse in near-native French: Clefts and focus. Language Learning62: 902–30.
17.
FengS (2019) The acquisition of English definite noun phrases by Mandarin Chinese speakers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition41: 881–96.
18.
FengS (2022) The computation and suspension of presuppositions by L1-Mandarin Chinese L2-English speakers. Second Language Research38: 737–63.
19.
HeZY (1988) A survey of pragmatics. Changsha: Hunan Education Press.
20.
HeimI (1990) Presupposition project. In: van der SantR (ed.) Reader for the Nijmegen Workshop on Presupposition, Lexical Meaning, and Discourse Processes. Nijmegen: University of Nijmegen.
21.
HoppH (2004) Syntactic and interface knowledge in advanced and near-native interlanguage grammars. EUROSLA Yearbook4: 67–94.
22.
HoppH (2006) Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research22: 369–97.
23.
HoppH (2009) The syntax–discourse interface in near-native L2 acquisition: Offline and online performance. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition12: 463–83.
24.
HuangS (1999) The emergence of a grammatical category definite article in spoken Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics31: 77–94.
25.
IoninTKoHWexlerK (2004) Article semantics in L2 acquisition: The role of specificity. Language Acquisition12: 3–69.
26.
IvanovI (2012) L2 acquisition of Bulgarian clitic doubling: A test case for the Interface Hypothesis. Second Language Research28: 345–68.
27.
JegerskiJ (2014) Self-paced reading. In: JegerskiJVanPattenB (eds) Research methods in second language psycholinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 20–49.
28.
KeatingGDJegerskiJ (2015) Experimental designs in sentence processing research: A methodological review and user’s guide. Studies in Second Language Acquisition37: 1–32.
29.
KripkeS (2009) Presupposition and anaphora: Remarks on the formulation of the projection problem. Linguistic Inquiry40: 367–86.
30.
KuznetsovaABrockhoffPBChristensenRHB (2017) LmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software82: 1–26.
31.
LanC (1999) Xiandaihanyuyusheyinfaxiangchutan [An exploration of the presupposition triggers in Modern Chinese]. Waiyuxuekan [Foreign Language Research]3: 11–14.
32.
LealT (2016) Look before you move: Clitic left dislocation in combination with other elements in the Spanish left periphery. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada [Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics]29: 396–428.
33.
LealTHootB (2022) L2 representation and processing of Spanish focus. Language Acquisition29: 410–40.
34.
LealTSlabakovaRFarmerTA (2017) The fine-tuning of linguistic expectations over the course of L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition39: 493–525.
35.
LewisD (1979) Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic8: 339–59.
36.
LiCNThompsonSA (1981) Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley / Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
37.
LiddellTMKruschkeJK (2018) Analyzing ordinal data with metric models: What could possibly go wrong?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology79: 328–48.
38.
LiuDGleasonJL (2002) Acquisition of the article the by nonnative speakers of English: An analysis of four nongeneric uses. Studies in Second Language Acquisition24: 1–26.
39.
MillerDGiancasproDIversonMRothmanJSlabakovaR (2016) Not just algunos, but indeed unos L2ers can acquire scalar implicatures in L2 Spanish. Language Acquisition Beyond Parameters51: 125–45.
40.
National College English Testing Committee (2006) CET-4 Test Syllabus and Sample Test Paper (Revised Version). Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
41.
O’GradyW (2011) Interfaces and processing. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism1: 63–66.
42.
ParadisJ (2011) The impact of input factors on bilingual development: Quantity versus quality. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism1: 67–70.
43.
RomoliJSchwarzF (2015) An experimental comparison between presupposition and indirect scalar implicatures. In: SchwarzF (ed.) Experimental Perspectives on Presuppositions. Berlin: Springer, pp. 215–40.
44.
RothmanJ (2009) Pragmatic deficits with syntactic consequences? L2 pronominal subjects and the syntax–pragmatics interface. Journal of Pragmatics41: 951–73.
45.
SimonsM (2001) On the conversational basis of some presuppositions. In: HastingsRJacksonBZvolenszkyZ (eds) Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT): Volume 11. Ithaca, NY: CLC, pp. 431–48.
46.
SlabakovaR (2010) Scalar implicatures in second language acquisition. Lingua120: 2444–62.
47.
SlabakovaR (2015) The effect of construction frequency and native transfer on second language knowledge of the syntax–discourse interface. Applied Psycholinguistics36: 671–99.
48.
SnapeN (2008) Resetting the Nominal Mapping Parameter in L2 English: Definite article use and the count–mass distinction. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition11: 63–79.
49.
SnapeNHosoiH (2018) Acquisition of scalar implicatures: Evidence from adult Japanese L2 learners of English. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism8: 163–92.
50.
SoraceA (2004) Native language attrition and developmental instability at the syntax–discourse interface: Data, interpretations and methods. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition7: 143–45.
51.
SoraceA (2011) Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approach to Bilingualism1: 1–33.
52.
SoraceA (2012) Pinning down the concept of interface in bilingual development: A reply to peer commentaries. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism2: 209–17.
53.
SoraceA (2016) Referring expressions and executive functions in bilingualism. Linguistic Approach to Bilingualism6: 669–84.
54.
SoraceAFiliaciF (2006) Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research22: 339–68.
55.
StalnakerR (1973) Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic2: 447–57.
56.
StalnakerR (1974) Pragmatic presuppositions. In: MunitzMUngerD (eds) Semantics and philosophy. New York: New York University Press, pp. 197–213.
57.
TiemannS (2014) The processing ofwieder (‘again’) and other presupposition triggers. Doctoral dissertation, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
58.
TrenkicD (2007) Variability in second language article production: Beyond the representational deficit vs. processing constraints debate. Second Language Research23: 289–327.
59.
TrenkicD (2008) The representation of English articles in second language grammars: Determiners or adjectives?Bilingualism: Language and Cognition11: 1–18.
60.
TsimpliMSoraceA (2006) Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax–semantics and syntax–discourse phenomena. BUCLD Proceedings30: 653–64.
61.
ValenzuelaE (2006) L2 end state grammars and incomplete acquisition of the Spanish CLLD constructions. In: SlabakovaRMontrulSPrévostP (eds) Inquiries in linguistic development: In honor of Lydia White. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 283–304.
62.
WhiteL (2011) The interface hypothesis: How far does it extend?Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism1: 108–10.
63.
ZeevatH (1992) Presupposition and accommodation in update semantics. Journal of Semantics9: 379–412. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/9.4.379
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
